Comment 2 for bug 397741

Hi Christophe !

Y don't agree with you even if it's may be the tiny's answer... But I will fight hard to have something better :) !

- First, I did not update = all, but update the module base via the client interface.

- Second, Tiny said last meeting that they want to improve the parametrization you can do in through the client... So, I'm asking : Why cannot we make the security parametrization perennial through the client ! It's really painfull.

- And last, thanks for the advice, but I know I can create a module, but the purpose is to not do it !! You're 10 times faster making the right mangement trough the client, rather than through the creation of an hertied new module...

So my though:

I may be agree that update=all from server could restore all default settings, I think it's not a bad features, in case you wanna restore everything by default (may be even xml data with the noupdate parameter set to true).

But when you update base module from client side, there is absolutely no reason for that ! It's dangerous and not documented at all ! You need to trust the ORM for that kind of operations. I just loose all my settings with that yesterday...

So, Tiny please, correct this.... This is unusable in a real production context...

Regards,

Joël